Politics Blog

Ward Connerly, the hero of the modern civil rights movement, isn’t about to let the states off the hook on affirmative action.

James Taranto thinks, as I do, that Howard Dean is the ideal Democratic nominee. For Republicans.

It’s perilous to speculate, but it’s also fun, so what the hell: What if Dr. Dean wins the first two contests, knocking out Mr. Gephardt in Iowa and Mr. Kerry in New Hampshire? That would leave Mr. Lieberman as the only centrist candidate standing in South Carolina, where the Democratic electorate is largely black. A victory by Mr. Sharpton over Mr. Lieberman would give Dr. Dean an aura of inevitability.

And what if Dr. Dean does take the Democratic nomination? The last time the Democrats nominated a far-left antiwar activist, George McGovern in 1972, the GOP won a 49-state victory. The Republicans duplicated the feat in 1984, though the magnitude of that landslide owed more to Ronald Reagan’s popularity than to anything uniquely objectionable about the establishmentarian liberal Walter Mondale.

A Bush-Dean election would pit a popular Republican incumbent against a left-wing Democratic challenger. It would be as if Mr. McGovern had challenged Mr. Reagan at a time when the latter was presiding over a popular war. The District of Columbia is probably safe for the Democrats, but a 50-state sweep for Mr. Bush wouldn’t be out of the question.

Go, Dean, Go! Howard Dean seems to have done pretty well in fundraising this quarter:

Former Vermont governor Howard Dean (D) announced yesterday that he has raised more than $6 million in the second quarter of this year, an achievement many of his competitors privately conceded will add new credibility to his insurgent bid for the Democratic presidential nomination.

In an e-mail to supporters, Dean said that over the past eight days – during which he formally announced his candidacy, appeared on “Meet the Press” and came in first in an online straw poll conducted by MoveOn.org – his fundraising surged with $2.8 million in donations.

If you took my advice and donated money to Howard Dean, you should be patting yourself on the back. The numbers go a long way towards making up for Dean’s terrible Meet the Press appearance.

Here’s The Note on the consequences of Dean’s fundraising:

The circumstances aren’t identical and the two campaigns will probably sneer at the comparison, but Howard Dean’s second-quarter haul is potentially as earth-quak-tic as the stunning number announced by the Bush campaign in the summer of 1999.

It’s not just how much money Dean will have to spend (a lot); it’s not just that money begats money (and stories about money begat money);

It’s not just the ultimate evidence that he is, in the words of Jill Lawrence, in the “top tier”

There are still a few hours left in this fundraising quarter. With a few donations, we can get Howard Dean past the magic $7 million number! It just takes a couple of minutes to donate by clicking here.

If you donate today, you might be one of five lucky Internet donors who get a personal phone call from Dean. Be sure to give him lots of encouragement if you get a call. We want this guy to be the Democratic nominee.

Almost there, less than $50,000 needed to hit the magic $7 million figure. You can put Dean over the top and have John Kerry tearing out his hair. In case you’re a new reader, here’s why you should donate to Dean.

Woohoo! Over $7 million, including over $700,000 today alone. And there’s still some time left to donate today.

The Democratic presidential primary is now officially a Kerry-Dean race.

For a candidate to raise almost a million dollars over the Internet in a single day was unthinkable just yesterday. This is the first presidential campaign where the Internet has truly made all the difference.

Even the Old York Times is waking up the sheer scale and scope of what the president is aiming for in 2004:

In 1994, when conservatives led by Newt Gingrich took control of the House, there was concern that their time in power would be limited. Today, many conservatives say, American public opinion is shifting their way, so there is no reason to be impatient - or to pressure Mr. Bush into doing things before the election that might hurt him next year.

“The Republicans are looking at decades of dominance in the House and the Senate, and having the presidency with some regularity,” Mr. Norquist said. “So if this year the tax cut isn’t the one we wanted - no biggie. There’s a sense that we can afford to wait.”

Fred Barnes says the stars are aligning just right:

THE POLITICAL STARS are suddenly aligned for President Bush for a smashing re-election victory in 2004. This doesn’t guarantee he’ll win. And it doesn’t preclude anything of political significance changing the situation between today and Election Day 16 months from now. What it does mean, though, is that if all goes as expected–and that’s a big “if”–Bush will be in an extremely strong position against his Democratic opponent.

The stars consist of six factors, all of which appear favorable to Bush at the moment. They are: an improving economy, a successful war, a big domestic triumph, a boatload of campaign money, an opposition party in disarray, an a discredited big media.

Of course, a year is a lifetime in politics…

Few people realize that, when it comes to fundraising, Republicans are the party of the little guy and Democrats are the party of the fat cat. A new study has some numbers that make it starkly obvious that Democrats are going to miss those million-dollar soft-money contributions:

The study, analyzing donations during the 2002 campaign cycle, found that those little guys giving less than $200 to federal candidates, parties or leadership political action committees contributed 64 percent of their money to Republicans. By contrast, those fat cats giving $1 million or more contributed a lopsided 92 percent to Democrats. The only group favoring Democrats, in fact, were contributors giving more than $100,000.

“The findings illustrate the Republicans’ strong advantage over Democrats in the current system,” the center concluded. That’s for sure. With the McCain-Feingold law capping total contributions at $95,000 per person, the Democrats are plain out of luck.